Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Help & tips > Other/general  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 23.09.2020, 19:22
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Geneva
Posts: 113
Groaned at 34 Times in 23 Posts
Thanked 77 Times in 49 Posts
mikedragos is considered knowledgeablemikedragos is considered knowledgeablemikedragos is considered knowledgeable
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Of course not. Just regurgitating dangerous, outlandish claims.
There are far more dangerous claims than this.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 23.09.2020, 19:40
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 4,620
Groaned at 255 Times in 181 Posts
Thanked 9,516 Times in 3,573 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
It's called a double standard. Democrats should know all about them.
Yes, a double-standard on the Republicans' part. There is a difference between a Supreme Court Justice dying and being replaced 9 months prior to an election and one being replaced just six weeks prior.

Above all else, what I see happening is that it's become more and more obvious that more clearly defined rules or laws need to be put in place regarding when a president can or cannot appoint a new Justice, prior to an election. What I think is also apparent is that the entire system of appointing Justices needs to be re-examined and 'upgraded' in order to try to secure a more balanced Supreme Court.
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank Pancakes for this useful post:
  #63  
Old 23.09.2020, 20:52
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
It's called a double standard. Democrats should know all about them.
I guess that makes it ok then. Nice job normalizing hypocrisy.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 23.09.2020, 20:54
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
There are far more dangerous claims than this.
Ahhh, as long as there are more dangerous ones, yours is ok. I’m really getting the hang of this.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 23.09.2020, 20:55
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,499
Groaned at 50 Times in 44 Posts
Thanked 3,377 Times in 1,628 Posts
HickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Yes, a double-standard on the Republicans' part. There is a difference between a Supreme Court Justice dying and being replaced 9 months prior to an election and one being replaced just six weeks prior.

Above all else, what I see happening is that it's become more and more obvious that more clearly defined rules or laws need to be put in place regarding when a president can or cannot appoint a new Justice, prior to an election. What I think is also apparent is that the entire system of appointing Justices needs to be re-examined and 'upgraded' in order to try to secure a more balanced Supreme Court.
Sorry that's just an entirely partisan view which overlooks the clear constitutional position which makes clear that the republicans had the mandate both to block the Obama judge and to appoint their own judge.

There ARE clearly defined rules you just don't like them.
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post:
This user groans at HickvonFrick for this post:
  #66  
Old 23.09.2020, 21:53
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Sorry that's just an entirely partisan view which overlooks the clear constitutional position which makes clear that the republicans had the mandate both to block the Obama judge and to appoint their own judge.

There ARE clearly defined rules you just don't like them.
Horse dung. Their excuse for blocking Obama's pick had nothing to do with any imaginary "mandate" in 2016, it was based on McConnell pulling out some dusty old rule so he could continue his vow to obstruct everything Obama tried to do.

Likewise, Trump's 46% of the vote is hardly a mandate.

And neither of those could ever constitute "clearly defined rules".
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank robogobo for this useful post:
The following 4 users groan at robogobo for this post:
  #67  
Old 23.09.2020, 21:58
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,499
Groaned at 50 Times in 44 Posts
Thanked 3,377 Times in 1,628 Posts
HickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Horse dung. Their excuse for blocking Obama's pick had nothing to do with any imaginary "mandate" in 2016, it was based on McConnell pulling out some dusty old rule so he could continue his vow to obstruct everything Obama tried to do.

Likewise, Trump's 46% of the vote is hardly a mandate.

And neither of those could ever constitute "clearly defined rules".
It's nothing to do with what the Republicans have said - which I totally agree is all over the place. It's to do with what the constitution says. Article II, Section II of the Constitution.

Last edited by HickvonFrick; 23.09.2020 at 22:08.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post:
  #68  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:00
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
It's nothing to do with what the Republicans have said - which I totally agree is all over the place. It's to do with what the constitution says. And yes Trump does have a mandate. Again from the constitution.
If Trump has a mandate simply because he's the current president, despite having lost the popular vote, then Obama had the mandate in 2016, having handily won both the EC and popular vote. Either way the hypocrisy is maddening and your previous post was full of problems.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at robogobo for this post:
  #69  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:07
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,499
Groaned at 50 Times in 44 Posts
Thanked 3,377 Times in 1,628 Posts
HickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
If Trump has a mandate simply because he's the current president, despite having lost the popular vote, then Obama had the mandate in 2016, having handily won both the EC and popular vote. Either way the hypocrisy is maddening and your previous post was full of problems.
No.... the mandate lies with the senate. Which the republicans held in 2016 and now in 2020. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the democrats want their way they are going to have to win the senate at some stage.

(When I said Trump has a mandate I meant in general terms - the election of the Sc Justice rests with the senate).

I would vote Biden in this election, so don't shoot the messenger!
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post:
This user groans at HickvonFrick for this post:
  #70  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:16
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Rip rgb

Or can we all try to live up to the standards of RBG and Scalia perhaps? Argue your point but not take it personally and respect that others may in fact, have a point?

You may not agree with their perspective and that's fine. But let's not make it personal if possible
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #71  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:29
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 827
Groaned at 29 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 2,725 Times in 961 Posts
ennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
No.... the mandate lies with the senate. Which the republicans held in 2016 and now in 2020. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the democrats want their way they are going to have to win the senate at some stage.

(When I said Trump has a mandate I meant in general terms - the election of the Sc Justice rests with the senate).

I would vote Biden in this election, so don't shoot the messenger!
I wrote this in another thread:

So what’s in the constitution is that the senate judiciary evaluates the president’s candidate, and the senate approves (or not) the candidate. The constitution says nothing about timing, so it is at the whim of the senate majority leader and the judiciary committee.

Seems like they could set some criteria on timing. Otherwise it gives the parties too much power. I think waiting 9 months is too long, and the argument “let the people decide” is disingenuous.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:31
st2lemans's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lugano
Posts: 31,570
Groaned at 2,349 Times in 1,710 Posts
Thanked 38,361 Times in 18,105 Posts
st2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Yes, but it's been a long-held tradition in the US that a new Justice is not appointed until after a presidential election, when the Justice that is being replaced had passed away very close to the election.
Election is in November, even should Trump lose he still has 2 1/2 months to go after!

Tom
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post:
The following 2 users groan at st2lemans for this post:
  #73  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:33
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
No.... the mandate lies with the senate. Which the republicans held in 2016 and now in 2020. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the democrats want their way they are going to have to win the senate at some stage.

(When I said Trump has a mandate I meant in general terms - the election of the Sc Justice rests with the senate).

I would vote Biden in this election, so don't shoot the messenger!
So the mandate lies here in one case, and there in the other case, but in 2016 the other mandate was more mandate-y than this mandate, because in the end anybody can do whatever they want as long as they cheat, double-talk, move the goal posts and deny what they said four years prior, which actually has nothing to do with a mandate. And then we can take that and say boo-hoo the rules are clear and you just don't like them.

F me.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank robogobo for this useful post:
This user groans at robogobo for this post:
  #74  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:33
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Election is in November, even should Trump lose he still has 2 1/2 months to go after!

Tom
You're repeating yourself.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank robogobo for this useful post:
This user groans at robogobo for this post:
  #75  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:37
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 827
Groaned at 29 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 2,725 Times in 961 Posts
ennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
Election is in November, even should Trump lose he still has 2 1/2 months to go after!

Tom
If he looses, he might be too busy.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank ennui for this useful post:
  #76  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:37
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,499
Groaned at 50 Times in 44 Posts
Thanked 3,377 Times in 1,628 Posts
HickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
So the mandate lies here in one case, and there in the other case, but in 2016 the other mandate was more mandate-y than this mandate, because in the end anybody can do whatever they want as long as they cheat, double-talk, move the goal posts and deny what they said four years prior, which actually has nothing to do with a mandate. And then we can take that and say boo-hoo the rules are clear and you just don't like them.

F me.
It's your country's constitution not mine! I agree the republican senators are duplicitous!
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:38
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 827
Groaned at 29 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 2,725 Times in 961 Posts
ennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
So the mandate lies here in one case, and there in the other case, but in 2016 the other mandate was more mandate-y than this mandate, because in the end anybody can do whatever they want as long as they cheat, double-talk, move the goal posts and deny what they said four years prior, which actually has nothing to do with a mandate. And then we can take that and say boo-hoo the rules are clear and you just don't like them.

F me.
Exactly. But the rules are not clear and perhaps should be clarified.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank ennui for this useful post:
  #78  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:41
robogobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 485
Groaned at 67 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 397 Times in 206 Posts
robogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond reputerobogobo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
It's your country's constitution not mine! I agree the republican senators are duplicitous!
Great, so stop using my country's constitution, of which you have a limited understanding – especially when it comes to what's a mandate and what's not a mandate – to taunt other users.

Quote:
Sorry that's just an entirely partisan view which overlooks the clear constitutional position which makes clear that the republicans had the mandate both to block the Obama judge and to appoint their own judge.

There ARE clearly defined rules you just don't like them.
It's more than a little incendiary.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at robogobo for this post:
  #79  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:53
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 827
Groaned at 29 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 2,725 Times in 961 Posts
ennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Read Frank Bruni‘s opinion in The NY Times. I found it interesting. One of his points is that a majority is not necessarily a mandate.

https://www.mcall.com/featured/sns-n...27i-story.html
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank ennui for this useful post:
  #80  
Old 23.09.2020, 22:59
st2lemans's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lugano
Posts: 31,570
Groaned at 2,349 Times in 1,710 Posts
Thanked 38,361 Times in 18,105 Posts
st2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rip rgb

Quote:
View Post
You're repeating yourself.
Some people need reminding.

Tom
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post:
This user groans at st2lemans for this post:
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:43.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0